�г��ٸ�

Partner Michael J. Boranian, Of Counsel Andrew W. Zarriello and Associate Timothy M. O’Toole successfully secured a unanimous defense verdict in a case involving a then 14-year-old plaintiff who presented to MCB’s client, an orthopedist, with a sprained ankle and a documented osteochondritis dissecans (OCD) lesion at the talus. The plaintiff had previously been seen by two other orthopedists and had undergone an MRI in July 2014.

MCB’s client examined the teenager, took X-rays, and confirmed and treated the OCD lesion. After casting the foot and discharging the plaintiff, she resumed athletic activities, including High School and other competitive basketball. Nearly two years later—during which time she had not seen any physician for complaints related to the foot—she returned to the practice and was seen by another physician in the group, again complaining of a sprained left ankle. An MRI performed at that time again documented the presence of the OCD lesion and, for the first time, found a left calcaneal cyst, further referencing a “tiny” cyst visible on the prior 2014 MRI from the same radiology group and not previously diagnosed or referenced. The patient subsequently sought treatment from another surgeon, who performed curettage and bone grafting. As of the time of trial, the patient had not received any follow-up care between August 2017 and March 2025, when she was seen by a podiatrist.

At trial, it was alleged that the defendant failed to properly advise and communicate the X-ray findings of a calcaneal cyst during the 2014 treatment. Throughout the case, MCB’s client maintained that the cyst was a benign, incidental, asymptomatic finding, not documented on the July 2014 MRI, and that he had the right to rely on the MRI results, which did not indicate any pain in the area.

Through cross-examination of the plaintiff’s expert, and with testimony from MCB’s expert orthopedist, we established that an MRI is the more sensitive diagnostic tool, that the treating physician has the right to rely upon the radiologist’s findings, and that neither the 2014 nor the 2016 MRI revealed any objective documentation of pain or injury to the heel. Rather, all of the patient’s complaints were related to the OCD lesion, which was appropriately addressed and successfully treated.

After two hours of deliberation over lunch, the jury returned a unanimous verdict in favor of MCB’s client.

��

‍